beta
Text
1. The defendant, at the same time, returned the shares listed in the separate sheet from the plaintiff by the non-party C Co., Ltd. to the plaintiff 164,500.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant, as the party, was in office with Nonparty D’s respective representative director from November 7, 1998 to September 12, 2014, established by Nonparty C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”).
B. C’s owned shares 1) C around October 13, 2005, Nonparty E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”).
(2) On May 2, 2006, E issued shares of KRW 55,600 (the face value of KRW 5,000) were owned. Of them, on November 30, 2005, E issued shares owned by C sold to a third party and became 35,600 shares (i.e., the above 55,600 shares - the above 20,000 shares). (ii) E divided the shares of KRW 5,00 into face value of KRW 5,000 on May 2, 2006. Accordingly, E issued shares owned by C became 356,00 shares (the above 35,600 shares x 100 shares).
C. On September 27, 2012, the Defendant acquired the Plaintiff’s shares held by C, 350,000 shares out of 356,00 shares issued by the said E, which were held by C (i.e., new shares were allocated at the rate of 1:1 shares as of November 24, 2015, and became 70,000 shares listed in the attached Form; hereinafter the same shall apply) and transferred all shares of 350,00 shares and 70,000 shares to the securities account in the Plaintiff’s name without distinguishing them from before and after the allocation of new shares.
C) On November 4, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff acquired the instant shares owned by C without any legal cause and filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking return of unjust enrichment (Seoul Central District Court 2015Gahap528913) regarding the instant shares. In the relevant lawsuit, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded the instant share purchase contract on October 13, 2005, and the Defendant concluded a sales contract on behalf of C on behalf of C as the representative director of C, and accordingly, the instant share purchase contract existed between the Plaintiff and C. However, on November 4, 2015, the said court asserted that there existed the instant shares sales contract on behalf of C. However, even though there was no fact that the instant shares sales contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and C, the Plaintiff subrogated for the Defendant’s personal liability of KRW 100 million.